The
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 45

Presentation IPEN 2012 Astana, Kazakhstan Dr. Christine Wörlen PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 48 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

The Climate Change Evaluators ‘ Community of Practice: Meta-Evaluations for Climate Change Mitigation; Tools and Usability. Presentation IPEN 2012 Astana, Kazakhstan Dr. Christine Wörlen. Outline. The Climate- Eval Community of Practice

Download Presentation

Presentation IPEN 2012 Astana, Kazakhstan Dr. Christine Wörlen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Presentation ipen 2012 astana kazakhstan dr christine w rlen

The Climate Change Evaluators‘ Community of Practice: Meta-Evaluations forClimate Change Mitigation; Tools and Usability

Presentation

IPEN 2012

Astana, Kazakhstan

Dr. Christine Wörlen


Outline

Outline

  • The Climate-Eval Community of Practice

  • The tools for evaluating climate mitigation projects

  • --- and how they can be used for project design

  • The other opportunities for knowledge creation at the community of practice


Presentation ipen 2012 astana kazakhstan dr christine w rlen

The Climate-Eval Community of Practice


History

History

  • 2007 Astana Workshop

  • 2008 Alexandria Conference

  • 2009 Website

  • 2010 linked-in

  • 2011 Jordan; Durban

  • 2012 – Russian-language group in Linked-In

    Functions:

    Knowledgerepository

    Analytical work


Important elements

Importantelements

  • Andrew

  • Website

  • Linked-in

  • Webinars

  • Discussions (online, telephone)

  • Some face-to-face interaction


Presentation ipen 2012 astana kazakhstan dr christine w rlen

Analytical workoftheClimate-Eval Community of Practice: The Mitigation Meta-Evaluation as an example


Typical climate change mitigation evaluation challenges i

Typicalclimatechangemitigationevaluationchallenges (I)

  • Baselineissues: counterfactualcanbedifficult

  • Ultimate impact: GHG-emissionreductiontogetherwitheconomicdevelopment (→ indicatorandmeasurementchallenges)

  • ismostlynot reacheddirectly but throughchanges in behaviour (investment, utilization) of GHG emittingactorsandtheirsupplychain


Evaluation framework tokle and uitto 2009

Evaluation Framework (TokleandUitto (2009))

Evaluation framework

GHG emissions

reduction or avoidance

Impacts

RESULTS

Sustainable market transformation

for increased energy savings

or applications of renewable energy

Outcomes

Enabling policies, strategies,

standards and certification in place

Adequate finance

available

Adequate business

infrastructure

Awareness

created

Innovation and

technology diffused

Develop enabling policies

standards and certification

Develop financing

instruments

and mechanisms

Develop business

models and provide

enterprise support

Develop and

disseminate

Information and

knowledge

Demonstrate creative

project approaches

and technologies

PERFORMANCE

Strategies


Typical climate change mitigation evaluation challenges ii

Typicalclimatechangemitigationevaluationchallenges (II)

  • Not onlyonegroupofstakeholdersplays a role in achievingthatresult, but a wholesector; consistingofusers, suppliers, financiersandpolicy .

  • But: manyclimatemitigationinterventionsaffectonlyonegroupofstakeholders (e.g. users OR supplychain OR policymakers OR financiers).

  • Issueswithattributionandcontextcomplicate „usual“ measurementchallenges – evenfortheevaluationof a singleawarenessorcapacitybuildingmeasure, thecontextandother initiatives needtobetakenintoaccount.


Keep developing this framework theory of change so that it will be able to

Keep developingthis Framework Theoryof Changeso thatit will beableto :

  • Reproduce „complete“ theoryofchange – not just thegroups / capacities / factors / aspectsthatarethesubjectoftheproject

  • Reflect sectoral context in a complete but „lean“ manner

  • Reflect relative importanceofimpeding / supportivefactorsforinterventionresults

  • Allowforthedevelopmentof (outcome) indicatorsacrossstakeholdersandinterventionsand GHG savingspotentials

  • Be flexible andrigorousatthe same time


Evaluation framework tokle and uitto 20091

Evaluation Framework (TokleandUitto (2009))

Evaluation framework

GHG emissions

reduction or avoidance

Impacts

RESULTS

Sustainable market transformation

for increased energy savings

or applications of renewable energy

Outcomes

Enabling policies, strategies,

standards and certification in place

Adequate finance

available

Adequate business

infrastructure

Financial sector

Awareness

created

Innovation and

technology diffused

Financial sector

Supply chain and infrastructure

Develop enabling policies

standards and certification

Develop financing

instruments

and mechanisms

Develop business

models and provide

enterprise support

Develop and

disseminate

Information and

knowledge

Demonstrate creative

project approaches

and technologies

Consumers

Policy makers

Consumters

PERFORMANCE

Strategies


Theory of non change barriers to energy efficiency behavior

Theory of Non-Change: Barriers to energy-efficiency behavior

Consumers / Users

Supply chain and infrastructure

Financial sector

Policy makers

Every group of stakeholders can slow down the diffusion of new technologies / behaviors. Typically, they are impeded by

  • IGNORANCE,

  • LACK OF MOTIVATION,

  • LACK OF ACCESS;

  • LACK OF EXPERTISE;

  • LACK OF BUSINESS MODELS,

  • LACK OF COST EFFECTIVENESS;

  • LACK OF AFFORDABILITY


Strategies to remove the barriers to energy efficiency behavior

Strategies to remove the barriers to energy-efficiency behavior

  • IGNORANCE,

  • LACK OF MOTIVATION,

  • LACK OF ACCESS;

  • LACK OF EXPERTISE;

  • LACK OF BUSINESS MODELS,

  • LACK OF COST EFFECTIVENESS;

  • LACK OF AFFORDABILITY

  • Information campaigns

  • Incentives (financial / nonfinancial)

  • Buildup of infrastructure

  • Capacity building

  • Business model development and demonstration

  • Reduce cost (economies of scale, economies of scope, subsidies)

  • Make financing available


Potential barriers to market transformation and intervention strategies toc 2

Potential barriersto market transformationandinterventionstrategies (TOC 2)

GHG emission reduction / reduced climate change impact

Overarching objective

Market transformation from GHG-emitting to GHG non-emitting behavior

Necessary precondition for MT and immediate outcome ccm intervention

  • awareness

  • expertise

  • access

  • business model

  • cost effectiveness

  • affordability

  • awareness

  • motivation

  • expertise

  • access

  • cost effectiveness

  • affordability

  • motivation

  • awareness

  • expertise

  • affordability

  • awareness

  • expertise

  • affordability

  • Business model

Supply chain and infrastructure

Financial sector

Consumers / users

StakeholderGroup

Barrier Removal Strategies (incomplete)

Develop and disseminate Information and knowledge for awareness

Technical training

Financial assistance (investment subsidies , loans, financial risk guarantees)

Policy makers

Provision of external advice and best practice models

Develop enabling policies standards and certification

Develop locally adapted solutions (business models, contractual arrangements, technologies)


Stakeholder and potential barriers to market transformation

Stakeholderand potential barriersto market transformation

  • Lack of awareness of energy efficient technology (ignorance)

  • Lack of technical competence (expertise)

  • Lack of access to technology for manufacturing or distribution

  • Lack of business model

  • Lack of cost effectiveness

  • Lack of working capital (affordability)

  • Lack of awareness of energy efficient technology (ignorance)

  • Lack of motivation / interest

  • Lack of technical competence (expertise)

  • Lack of access to technology

  • Lack of cost effectiveness

  • Lack of investment capital (affordability)

Market Transformation

GHG redu +econ. benefit

  • Lack of motivation / interest

  • Lack of awareness of energy efficient technology (ignorance)

  • Lack of technical competence (expertise) for designing effective policies

  • Lack of fiscal means (affordability)

  • Lack of technical competence for evaluating technology (expertise)

  • Lack of business model (risk)

  • Lack of cost effectiveness

  • Lack of liquidity (affordability)


Barrier circle or why things are not changing

“Barrier Circle” – or “why things are NOT changing”

Red: “This barrier is a show-stopper for the market.”

Orange: “This is a significant barrier.”

Yellow: “Not a good situation, but no significant challenge.”

Green: “This potential barrier is not impeding market development.”


Simplification leave off inner two circles intermediate and ultimate objectives

Simplification: leave off inner two circles (intermediate and ultimate objectives)


Then overlay with project

Then: Overlay with project


Project strategies can be aligned with the respective barriers

Project strategies can be aligned with the respective barriers.


Tonc circle and barrier removal strategies

TONC-Circle and Barrier Removal Strategies


Approach of this study

Approach of this study

  • Test Theoryof Non-Change (TONC) on a setofclimatemitigationinterventionsfromonesector (e.g. energyefficientproducts)

  • Refine TONC, clarifyterminologyandbarrier-strategycouples

  • Test on othersectors

  • …todevelopgeneralizedSector Transformation TOC

  • (Developindicatorsforthebarriers. As barrierremovalistheresultoftheproject, thesecan also betheresultindicatorsfor market transformationinterventions.)

    NB: Evaluation studies are the only possible source for this type of analysis. However, due to the variations in evaluation questions and other factors, not all of them are equally useful for this analysis.


Testing the tonc market transformation through demand side management in thailand since 1992

Testing the TONC: Market Transformation through Demand Side Management in Thailand since 1992

  • Thai economy: 10.6% annual growth between 1986 and 1995

  • Energy demand increased in step

  • In 1992: Energy Conservation Law with obligatory energy reporting for large consumers and other (softer) measures.

  • The national energy utility EGAT started

  • We look at 2 cases:

    • energy efficient lighting in households and

    • energy efficiency in industrial and commercial facilities

  • Crises:

    • Thai / Asian Financial Crisis in 1997

    • Privatization of EGAT in 2000-2002

  • Test Question: can the model reflect market transformation successes and failures?


Three different markets

Three different markets

  • Replacing T12 tubes by T8 tubes

  • Replacing light bulbs with energy savings bulbs (compact fluorescent lamps, CFLs)

  • Replacing inefficient building chillers (large AC units) in commercial and industrial buildings with efficient building chillers.


Market barrier cycle for efficient t8 light tubes in 2002 na phuket wb post ia

Market barrier cycle for efficient T8 light tubes in 2002 (Na Phuket; WB Post-IA)


Wb dsm gtz project activities for t8 light tubes na phuket sulyma wb

WB DSM + GTZ project activities for T8 light tubes(Na Phuket, Sulyma, WB)


T8 market after dsm project in 2000 wb evaluations

T8 market after DSM Project in 2000 (WB evaluations)


Market barrier cycle for energy savings bulbs cfl na phuket wb post ia

Market barrier cycle for energy savings bulbs (CFL)(Na Phuket; WB Post-IA)


Project approach for efficient clf na phuket wb post ia

Project approach for efficient CLF (Na Phuket; WB Post-IA)


Market barrier cycle for efficient clf at the end of project 2000 wb icr

Market barrier cycle for efficient CLF at the end of project (2000) (WB ICR)


Interim test result

Interim test result

  • Tool can reflect changes in market barriers and barrier removal strategies

  • Easy to handle

  • It becomes clear that every “market” (in the sense of a GHG emission reducing activity) needs its own set of analyses as the barriers are not of the same strength

  • Currently only qualitative analysis possible – more standardization needed for it to have more predictive power


Industrial energy efficiency in 1992

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 1992

Overall economic boom

Rapid investment in new industrial and commercial facilities

Energy efficiency is an afterthought

Supply chain is happy to provide inefficient chillers

Policy makers know what to do but not how


Industrial energy efficiency in 1992 encon law wb gef dsm project gtz project

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 1992: ENCON law, WB/GEF DSM project, GTZ project

Law requires large facilities to conduct Energy Audits

DSM project with EGAT as implementing agency to include industrial energy efficiency

From 1996: GTZ provides training to policy makers


Industrial energy efficiency in 2000 no success due to financial crisis

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 2000: no success, due to financial crisis

Energy Audits have been conducted by many but not implemented

EGAT as implementing agency is in the process of being restructured

Financial markets broke down, so that users can’t afford investments

They also have other worries…


Industrial energy efficiency in 2001 wb gef building chiller replacement project

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 2001: WB GEF Building Chiller Replacement Project

Took three years to develop

EGAT unavailable

New implementing agency is a large bank


Industrial energy efficiency in 2001 wb gef building chiller replacement project1

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 2001: WB GEF Building Chiller Replacement Project

Is removing a number of barriers


Industrial energy efficiency in 2001 wb gef building chiller replacement project2

Industrial Energy Efficiency in 2001: WB GEF Building Chiller Replacement Project

Is removing a number of barriers

…but receives competition from EGAT once national funds are released


Leading to a vibrant building chiller market in 2005

…leading to a vibrant building chiller market in 2005.


Impact of 1997 asian financial crisis on energy efficiency projects in thailand

Impact of 1997 Asian financialcrisis on energyefficiencyprojects in Thailand

  • Original motivation for energy efficiency efforts was economic growth, not climate change!

  • Projects that were designed and implemented immediately after the financial crisis were affected more strongly than those that were under implementation during the financial crisis (example: Building Chiller Replacement, Energy Efficiency Revolving Fund).

  • Impact of financial crisis on ongoing projects: extension in time, slowdown of privatization of public entities (EGAT), more difficulties to include private sector in projects, households were comparatively less affected.


Alternative display comp table

Alternative display: comptable

  • Color codeallows to compareseveralprojects in tables

  • Here: casestudyPolanddistrictheating


Use of tonc in project design

Useof TONC in project design

  • TheoryofNo Change: Analyzingbarriershelps find out wherethenextproject can push theenvelope, cost-effectively(ClimateWorks evaluation, GEF EO impactstudy); itlooksacross different stakeholdergroups

  • UseofToolforcomparing different projects can helptransferlessonslearned / usefulprojectapproaches / bestpracticesfromoneprojectotanother.

  • UseofComparison Table allowsforchoiceofmostappropriate alternative behavior to beimplemented in nextproject.

    Overall, thisanalysistellsyouwhat to do next.


Presentation ipen 2012 astana kazakhstan dr christine w rlen

How do peopleusetheClimate-Eval Community of Practice?


Elements of the community of practice

Elements ofthe Community of Practice

  • Mostly online

  • Members register,

  • Weekly (periodic – maybe twice or once a month) newsletter

  • Other social media: Twitter (@climateeval with 247 ‚followers‘)

  • Discussions through linked-in (language subgroups – French, Spanish and soon, Russian)

  • Online resources:

    • Database of evaluations (500+)

    • Multimedia content – recordings of webinar, etc

    • Blog posts

    • Job announcements


Membership

Membership

  • Institutionalevaluators

  • Project managers

  • Consultants / independentandconsultingfirms

  • Researchers in universitiesandthink-tanks


Important elements1

Importantelements

  • Andrew

  • Website, newsletter

  • Linked-in (including a group in Russian)

  • Webinars

  • Discussions (online, telephone)

  • Some face-to-face interaction

    Howcouldyouenvisionusingit?

    Whatwouldmakeitmorehelpful to you?


Thank you for your attention

Thank you for your attention.

  • Further Questions?

  • www.climate-eval.org

  • Climate-eval(at)climate-eval.org

  • Christine Wörlen, woerlen(at)arepo-consult.com


  • Login